I agree with Wols; a subroutine takes more memory and is slower to launch but is so much easier to work with in any sized system. It's funny, our subroutines are oddly similar to how Microsoft implemented DLL wrecknology for Windows, but we've never had the kind of hell that Windows programmers experience. Funny how that works... :)
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Wols Lists <antli...@youngman.org.uk> wrote: > On 07/02/12 23:46, Kevin King wrote: > > An include is fine for declarations, but not for executable code due to > the > > fact that individual lines in the include cannot be debugged (on > Unidata). > > Declarations like EQUates and common blocks are best uses for includes. > > The need to break apart big routines due to some arbitrary limit (i.e. > > 32K) is no longer a valid argument and without the ability to debug > > included code, any gains quickly become lost. > > Plus, what happens if you ever want to update that code? > > If it's INCLUDEd in twenty different files, you need to recompile the > lot - that is if you even know what files include it! (And don't say you > can search, you're quite likely to miss something). > > If it's a subroutine, you know one recompile and you've caught all > instances. > > Cheers, > Wol > _______________________________________________ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
